{"title":"读者咨询与参考资料:立场不同","authors":"E.E. Lawrence, Virginia Sharpe","doi":"10.1108/jd-03-2024-0071","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to determine how we ought to distinguish between reference and readers' advisory (RA) service, given the latter’s turn toward a whole collection approach. In other words, the paper answers this question: If both reference and RA librarians aim to meet patrons’ information needs and may theoretically do so using the same materials, then how are we to differentiate the two services conceptually?Design/methodology/approachIn this conceptual paper, we posit that we can distinguish between RA and reference using Louise Rosenblatt’s theory of the aesthetic transaction. With this theory in hand, we can redefine the service distinction in terms of the stance – aesthetic or efferent – that the patron expects to take toward the material they seek.FindingsOn our account, the reader’s desired stance becomes a kind of hermeneutical lens through which a library worker may productively evaluate plausible pathways and materials. An aesthetic lens is characteristic of RA; it makes features of potential aesthetic transactions between a particular reader and a particular text (or genre or author’s oeuvre) salient.Originality/valueThe proposed account constitutes a novel application of Rosenblattian response theory, one that grounds and refines the going view that RA’s proper focus is on supporting a particular sort of experience rather than providing particular sorts of texts. This theoretical emendation also better aligns the service distinction with contemporary conceptualizations of RA as a “whole collection” service. Important practical and philosophical implications follow from the new account.","PeriodicalId":506264,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Documentation","volume":" 30","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Readers' advisory vs reference: a difference of stance\",\"authors\":\"E.E. Lawrence, Virginia Sharpe\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jd-03-2024-0071\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to determine how we ought to distinguish between reference and readers' advisory (RA) service, given the latter’s turn toward a whole collection approach. In other words, the paper answers this question: If both reference and RA librarians aim to meet patrons’ information needs and may theoretically do so using the same materials, then how are we to differentiate the two services conceptually?Design/methodology/approachIn this conceptual paper, we posit that we can distinguish between RA and reference using Louise Rosenblatt’s theory of the aesthetic transaction. With this theory in hand, we can redefine the service distinction in terms of the stance – aesthetic or efferent – that the patron expects to take toward the material they seek.FindingsOn our account, the reader’s desired stance becomes a kind of hermeneutical lens through which a library worker may productively evaluate plausible pathways and materials. An aesthetic lens is characteristic of RA; it makes features of potential aesthetic transactions between a particular reader and a particular text (or genre or author’s oeuvre) salient.Originality/valueThe proposed account constitutes a novel application of Rosenblattian response theory, one that grounds and refines the going view that RA’s proper focus is on supporting a particular sort of experience rather than providing particular sorts of texts. This theoretical emendation also better aligns the service distinction with contemporary conceptualizations of RA as a “whole collection” service. Important practical and philosophical implications follow from the new account.\",\"PeriodicalId\":506264,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Documentation\",\"volume\":\" 30\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Documentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-03-2024-0071\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Documentation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-03-2024-0071","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的本文的目的是确定,鉴于参考咨询和读者咨询(RA)服务已转向全藏书方法,我 们应如何区分参考咨询和读者咨询(RA)服务。换句话说,本文要回答这个问题:如果参考咨询和读者咨询馆员都以满足读者的信息需求为目标,并且理论上可以使用相同的资料,那么我们该如何在概念上区分这两种服务呢? 设计/方法/方法在这篇概念性论文中,我们认为可以使用路易斯-罗森布拉特的审美交易理论来区分读者咨询和参考咨询。有了这一理论,我们就可以根据读者对他们所寻求的资料所期望采取的立场--审美立场或效果立场--来重新定义服务的区别。研究结果根据我们的观点,读者所期望的立场成为一种诠释学透镜,图书馆工作人员可以通过这种透镜来有效地评估可信的路径和资料。美学透镜是文献资源检索的特征;它使特定读者与特定文本(或流派或作者作品)之间潜在的美学交易特征变得突出。原创性/价值所提出的观点是对罗森布拉特回应理论的一种新颖应用,它支持并完善了以往的观点,即文献资源检索的适当重点是支持特定类型的体验,而不是提供特定类型的文本。这一理论修正也更好地将服务区分与当代将 RA 视为 "全集 "服务的概念相一致。新的论述具有重要的实践和哲学意义。
Readers' advisory vs reference: a difference of stance
PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to determine how we ought to distinguish between reference and readers' advisory (RA) service, given the latter’s turn toward a whole collection approach. In other words, the paper answers this question: If both reference and RA librarians aim to meet patrons’ information needs and may theoretically do so using the same materials, then how are we to differentiate the two services conceptually?Design/methodology/approachIn this conceptual paper, we posit that we can distinguish between RA and reference using Louise Rosenblatt’s theory of the aesthetic transaction. With this theory in hand, we can redefine the service distinction in terms of the stance – aesthetic or efferent – that the patron expects to take toward the material they seek.FindingsOn our account, the reader’s desired stance becomes a kind of hermeneutical lens through which a library worker may productively evaluate plausible pathways and materials. An aesthetic lens is characteristic of RA; it makes features of potential aesthetic transactions between a particular reader and a particular text (or genre or author’s oeuvre) salient.Originality/valueThe proposed account constitutes a novel application of Rosenblattian response theory, one that grounds and refines the going view that RA’s proper focus is on supporting a particular sort of experience rather than providing particular sorts of texts. This theoretical emendation also better aligns the service distinction with contemporary conceptualizations of RA as a “whole collection” service. Important practical and philosophical implications follow from the new account.